Lord Ahmed of Rotherham: Former peer guilty of child sex offences

[Celerity]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-59607283



A former Labour peer has been found guilty of sexual offences against two children in the 1970s. Lord Ahmed of Rotherham was convicted of a serious sexual assault against a boy and the attempted rape of a young girl. Sheffield Crown Court heard the repeated sexual abuse happened in Rotherham when he was a teenager. The 64-year-old, who appeared under his real name of Nazir Ahmed, had denied the charges.

During trial, prosecutor Tom Little QC told the court Lord Ahmed had attempted to rape the girl in the early 1970s, when the defendant was aged 16 or 17 but she was much younger. The attack on the boy, who was aged under 11 at the time, also happened during the same period. Mr Little said Lord Ahmed claimed the allegations were a "malicious fiction" but a phone recording of a 2016 conversation between the two victims showed they were not "made-up or concocted". The woman's call was prompted by an email from the male victim saying: "I have evidence against that paedophile," the jury previously heard.

Lord Ahmed was charged along with his two older brothers, Mohammed Farouq, 71, and Mohammed Tariq, 65, but both were deemed unfit to stand trial. Both had faced charges of indecent assault against the same boy abused by Lord Ahmed. Though the men did not face a criminal trial, jurors concluded that they did commit the alleged acts after hearing evidence in the case. Lord Ahmed, who was convicted following a retrial, resigned from the House of Lords in November 2020 after a conduct committee report concluded he had sexually and emotionally exploited a vulnerable woman who sought his help. The inquiry into his behaviour followed a BBC Newsnight investigation.

The report made him the first peer to be recommended for expulsion but he resigned before this could be implemented. Rosemary Ainslie, head of the Crown Prosecution Service's special crime division, said: "By these verdicts the jury has clearly decided that no matter the delay between the offences and the trial, and the defences raised, they could be sure that the accounts of the victims were credible and true. "One of these defendants held a position of power, influence and responsibility for some time in the House of Lords but this case clearly illustrates that where there is sufficient evidence, even in challenging cases, the CPS will bring a prosecution, put evidence before a jury and see rightful convictions."

snip

[OneBro]

1. After 47 years?

I suspect we are all fans of accountability for one’s actions, but it is virtually impossible to defend against allegations of this nature raised 47 years later. Surely there was some concrete, damning evidence that was left out of the article.

I’m not suggesting that the recorded call in this matter was staged, but humans are absolutely capable of doing so and have done so.

The older the allegations, the more objectively solid the evidence should be. I know I have NEVER raped anyone, but I sure as hell can’t account for where I was or who I was with 47 years ago, especially if I was 16 or 17 years old at the time.